Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Game over ...
I never said anyone was stupid!

And with regard to mirrorless, Sony and to some extent Fuji have had the advantage of entering the market with innovative products, and gaining experience and building reputations that can allow them to charge more.

I like DSLR's a lot myself. The bigger camera with a bigger grip feels good and stable in my hand(s).

Maybe it makes sense for Canon to charge so much for RF lenses. As a point of pride you would want to have something really impressive to kick off the RF series cameras. But Canon is the new kid in town. If people want overpriced lenses for mirrorless cameras...well, they already have Sony! But anyway, I still think my EF mount or die approach will work very well for me. Canon seems to know its marketing. I hope it keeps working for them. And EF lenses are the best bargains out there, by far, IMHO!
@ Klaus: No, I am not saying that!

I have always marveled at Canon's marketing successes. Why, they have never made a single "L" lens for EF-S, and yet crop sensors cameras and lenses seem to be where the money is!

What I meant is that in a contracting market you are more obligated to provide value. Maybe they think they can sell 1/2.3" imager based all-in-one cameras, or at the very least those tiny rebels with the plastic lenses. But they haven't shown they can compete in mirrorless. The one area they will confine their lens development.

I was really disappointed to hear how sorry there mirrorless 1:2 macro was! That was not exactly a demanding spec to deliver on!

Anyways, just for the sake of the argument, I'm not so sure that the cameras aren't making the most money. You see how little they can sell the cheaper model cameras with the same sensors, and much the same capabilities as their high end cameras. 5D Mk iv price versus EOS R?

If anything I'm saying maybe they should have made a mount that was not so inviting to lower priced far superior (in some cases) EF lenses. But just as well that they did!
I do not understand where you get the notion that somehow the RF 35mm f1.8 IS STM i s not a good lens, Arthur? From all I have seen, it is very decent to say the least.... And NOT worse than the EF 35mm f2 IS USM.
Well, I guess vignetting of 2-4 EV values does not seem that good to me. It seems ridiculous to claim that the camera does in camera correction for this. How is that better than saying an F/3.5 lens is really and F/2 lens if the camera adds 1 1/2 stops of exposure to every shot?

Just coincidentally Klaus added example photos for the lens at the same time I was writing my post. At F/10 it seems to perform O.K. I can't say anything good about the shots taken at F/4.5 or wider. Maybe you haven't seen them? If you think it performs like a prime macro lens, or even a prime 35mm lens...well I can only say I disagree. It's just not good enough to use for macro use. And I don't think you'd really what to compare it with any decent prime lens in the EF mount! What is a Sony or Fuji user going to say if they were offered a lens like this for their cameras?

I'm sorry! Maybe it's just me....

Forum Jump:

Users browsing this thread:
1 Guest(s)